The Supreme Court delivered a significant verdict on Monday, stating that lawmakers cannot claim immunity for accepting bribes in exchange for delivering a speech or casting a vote in the legislature. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud led a seven-judge constitution bench that unanimously overruled the 1998 PV Narasimha Rao case verdict. In that ruling, a five-judge constitution bench had established parliamentary immunity against criminal prosecution for any speech made or vote cast within the House under Article 105(2) and Article 194(2) of the Constitution.
During the pronouncement of the verdict, Chief Justice DY Chandrachud emphasized that bribery does not fall under the protection of parliamentary privileges. He argued that the interpretation of the 1998 verdict contradicts Articles 105 and 194 of the Constitution, which govern the powers and privileges of MPs and MLAs in Parliament and legislative assemblies.
The Chief Justice stressed that bribery undermines integrity in public life. He stated during the hearing, “Bribery is not rendered immune under Article 105(2) or 194 of the Constitution. Bribery erodes probity in public life.” He further emphasized, “The offence of bribery is agnostic, and it does not matter whether a vote is cast in a certain direction or not cast at all. Bribery is complete when it is accepted.”
Prime Minister Narendra Modi applauded the Supreme Court’s decision in the JMM bribery case, hailing it as a “great judgment” that will promote clean politics and strengthen people’s trust in the system. The top court had reserved its judgment on the matter on October 5, 2023. During the proceedings, the Centre argued that bribery cannot be a subject of immunity, and parliamentary privilege does not exempt lawmakers from the law.
The judgement was reserved after extensive arguments presented by various legal representatives, including the attorney general, solicitor general, and amicus curiae PS Patwalia. The seven-judge bench revisited the 1998 verdict 25 years after the JMM bribery scandal rocked the nation. The apex court reconsidered whether lawmakers’ immunity from prosecution for accepting bribes to deliver a speech or vote extends to them even when criminality is involved.
The issue came to the forefront again in 2019 when a bench led by then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi heard an appeal from Sita Soren, a JMM MLA and daughter-in-law of party chief Shibu Soren, who was implicated in the JMM bribery scandal. Sita Soren, accused of accepting bribes to vote in the Rajya Sabha election in 2012, argued for the application of constitutional immunity to her case. The apex court agreed to revisit the SC verdict in the JMM bribery case, involving Shibu Soren and four other party MPs who accepted bribes to vote against a no-confidence motion against the P V Narasimha Rao government in 1993, ensuring its survival.